Criminal Procedure EXAM TIPS- Fruit of the Poisonous Tree PDF

Preview

Summary

Exam Tips for fruits of poisonous tree for the Criminal Procedure Final Exam Essay Portion...

Description

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE EXAM TIPS: Fruit of the Poisonous Tree

Fruit of the Poisonous Tree Evidence; things or verbal statements, etc., that derive from Government;s unlawful activity will be suppressed. NOTE: When we talk about suppression, we are talking about excluding evidence from the government’s case in chief. However, the suppressed evidence may still be used to impeach a testifying defendant. In analyzing the exclusionary rule and FOTP what is important is following: • Who the defendant is • The pieces of evidence being used against them, and • How that evidence was obtained (and whether it is tainted by unlawful activity) o Here, you need to know the improper event/ when the violation of rights or unlawful search occurs. (Arrows may be useful, See Wong Sun) Fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine is subject to three important exceptions: • Whether evidence was discovered from an independent source of the illegal activity (outside of poisonous tree) (Murray) • Whether the discovery of the evidence was inevitable (Nix) • If there is attenuation between the illegal activity and the discovery of the evidence (Wong Sun’s confession in Wong Sun) o Attenuation factors: ▪ length of time between the illegal act and obtaining the evidence, (Wing Sun, Ceccilini) ▪

flagrancy of the illegal act (police conduct), (Strieff)

▪ presence of intervening causes, (Strieff) ▪ the absence of coercion or free will in obtaining evidence,

▪ disconnect between the violation and suppression as remedy, (Hudson, Strieff) ▪ Physical distance?." I.

Wong Sun v. US: a. Facts: Hom Way  James Toy (Illegal Conduct)  Johnny Yee  Wong Sun i. 2 AM – Hom Way arrested with heroin  he says the heroin was bought from Blackie Toy (James Wah Toy). ii. 6 AM – police went to laundry mat operated by James Toy on street mentioned by Hom. The laundry mat did not identify that James Toy and Blackie Toy were the same person. iii.At laundry matt, they enter James Wah Toy’s house unlawfully, James Wah Toy is arrested (no PC, unlawful entry). 1. James Wah Toy gives police a statement saying that he got the drugs from Johnny Yee, on 11th Ave [Divergence after this] iv. The police then found Johnny Yee, enter his bedroom, and arrest him because he was in possession of heroin. 1. Yee implicates Toy & Wong Son (aka Sea Dog). 2. Police go to Wong Sun’s house 3. Police arrest Wong Sun and Toy (unlawfully) and make they make subsequent statements (Time occurs before statements). b. Evidence being used against John Toy i. Toy’s statements from his bedroom/ Arrest Statements: 1. CT Fruit Holding #1: Toy’s verbal statements are the fruits of the poisonous tree and will be suppressed. a. Verbal evidence derived from an unlawful entry/search and unlawful arrest (without PC)

b. Statements were not given under free will (agents broke through door, etc.) ii. The heroin from Yee: 1. CT Fruit Holding #2: Yee’s Heroin can’t be used against Toy - they are fruits of the poisonous tree from the unlawful entry and arrest of Toy. a. Information on these drugs came directly from Toy’s statements when he was being arrested without proper PC, the unlawful event. b. They were not able to argue that they were able to obtain the information about Yee’s drugs outside of Toy’s statements during the unlawful event. (No Independent source of Yee) c. Because No independent source, also could not argue “inevitable discovery” as an exception. d. Toy’s right’s were violated, will have standing. e. Heroin from Yee will be different for Wong Sun, does not have standing because HIS rights were not violated in the unlawful arrest of Toy that produced the Statement that led to heroin. iii.Toy’s police statement: 1. (Never discussed again in class) c. Evidence being used against Wong Sun: i. Heroin from Yee: 1. Key Standing Holding: Heroin attained from Yee, even though the product of an unlawful arrest of Toy, was not a fruit against Wong Sun and CAN be admitted against Won Sun. a. Wong Sun did not enter the picture until after the heroin was obtained, so no rights of Wong Sun’s

were violated in order to obtain the heroin from Yee. b. Wong Sun lacks standing to object to the evidence because no connection to the place that was unlawfully searched. Not Wong Sun’s tree. ii. Wong Sun’s Confession to Police: 1. CT Fruit Holding #3: Wong Sun’s confession was not the fruit of his arrest – taint had been attenuated. a. Wong Sun was free and out on his own before his arrest statement/ confession. So the taint of the officer’s illegal conduct has been attenuated.  Too much time and intervening freedom between Sun’s arrest and confession. II.

Practice Problem: Police search Leonard’s home illegally. They find no evidence of crime/no contraband there, but they do find, on a slip of paper, the address to Joan’s home. Joan was not previously a suspect. Police go immediately to Joan’s home, and search it illegally as well. There they find drugs and documents that Joan and Leonard are engaged in a narcotics conspiracy. Which is true? a. At Joan’s trial, the court will suppress the slip of paper. i. False. In court, the government could not use the drugs and documents against Joan. (Gov. entered her home illegally, which led to the drugs and documents. Those are fruits of the poisonous tree (illegal entry to her house) 1. Slip of paper did not come from that tree. 2. Joan would have no standing to suppress the slip of paper because she had no connection to the place that was searched illegally (Leonard’s home)(Maybe if she was an overnight guest?) b. At Leonard’s trial, the court will suppress the drugs and documents. i. True. Leonard is likely to be successcul in suppressing both the piece of paper AND the drugs and documents from Joan’s.

1. Police would not have found the drugs if they did not illegally enter Leonard’s house to get slip of paper. (Unless Gov can find excuse: Independent source, Inevitability or attenuation.) 2. Slip of Paper suppressed easily. This is evidence found during the illegal search at his home. That is his tree completely. III.

NOTE on STANDING: a. Do not talk about at the beginning of a 4A analysis. First whether 4A event, then whether 4A requirements met, THEN can discuss in remedies and suppression whether standing is an issue. "

IV.

United States v. Ceccolini: a. The evidence at issue is the subsequent interview of the employee/ clerk months after the police illegally searched and found policy slips that gave information that lead to the interview. However: i. The testimony/ interview was not suppressed because she voluntarily gave the statements and was not coerced by authorities 1. Fact that months later when speak to clerk significant. ii. The policy slips themselves will not be admitted but the interview of the flower shop clerk will not be suppressed and will be admitted because the statements were voluntary and not coerced.

V.

Utah v. Strieff: (Attenuation) a. Facts: Anonymous tip of drug activity. Police observe house where they saw Strieff leaving. They followed him and stopped him noticing that he had a warrant out for his arrest. During the SITA they found drugs. Strieff argued it was an unlawful Terry stop so the search was unlawful as well. b. Holding: The evidence was not suppressed under the facts, even though there was unlawful police conduct in the case in an unlawful stop. (Terry stop need reasonable suspicion, but no RS here, not observing house long enough) i. 3 Factors for whether evidence needed to be suppressed:

1. Temporal Proximity (time): This went in favor of Strieff. Search occurred only minutes after unreasonable stop. 2. Presence of Intervening Circumstance: Police discovered there was an arrest warrant. (Favorable to government) 3. Flagrancy of the Illegal Police Conduct: Good faith mistake of the police, no evidence this was a part of a broader, deliberate police strategy. Doesn’t seem like outrageous police behavior. a. In Flagrancy, asking how far from lawful is the polic misconduct....